The Players Corner Archive

>look andras
>You see GameMaster Andraste Tir-Namban the Elf Demonmistress.
She appears to be remarkably youthful despite her advancing age. Kohl black hair cascades down to her ankles, offseting her milk-white complexion and eyes the hue of a summer sky at noon. Graceful pointed ears peek out from her silken tresses, adorned with gemstones that match her eyes, and a sardonic smile dances upon her full ruby lips. Perched on one shoulder is a nasty-looking raven. Suitably dressed for the rigors of her work, her attire goes largely unnoticed in the face of her stunning beauty.

[This message has been edited by Weedmage Princess (edited 02-16-2002).] reg

quote:

---

Originally posted by Weedmage Princess:
>look andras
>You see GameMaster Andraste Tir-Namban the Elf Demonmistress.
She appears to be remarkably youthful despite her advancing age. Kohl black hair cascades down to her ankles, offseting her milk-white complexion and eyes the hue of a summer sky at noon. Graceful pointed ears peek out from her silken tresses, adorned with gemstones that match her eyes, and a sardonic smile dances upon her full ruby lips. Perched on one shoulder is a nasty-looking raven. Suitably dressed for the rigors of her work, her attire goes largely unnoticed in the face of her stunning beauty.

---

Well let's see. Remarkably youthful despite her advancing age...is utterly meaningless and offers no indication whatsoever of "age" for an elf. They live several hundred years, so are we talking 300 years old but looks around 15? And...how do we know that she's got advancing age in the first place, if she looks so young, huh?

Next on the list...
Offsetting is misspelled.

Next...
Graceful pointed ears peek out from her silken tresses, adorned with gemstones that match her eyes, and a sardonic smile dances upon her full ruby lips.

This whole thing is just - wrong. First of all, are those sky-blue gemstones adorning her ears, or her hair? That's a major grammatical error. The smile dancing on her lips...does that mean her mouth is twitching? If not, then she really should consider changing that.

Next...
Perched on one shoulder is a nasty-looking raven.

Well I happen to LIKE ravens. So in my mind, a nasty-looking one is one that hasn't been cared for, and is molting something fierce and perhaps might have a broken wing or a cracked beak. I get the feeling she is trying to tell us that it's fierce-looking, not nasty-looking. Fierce would be an actual descriptive of the raven's appearance, while "nasty" would be subjective depending upon the reader. Forcing subjective adjectives on the reader is breaking the "rules" of game descriptions. Shame on her, she should know better.

Next...
Suitably dressed for the rigors of her work, her attire goes largely unnoticed in the face of her stunning beauty.

Errr..no. If I am noticing that she's suitably dressed for the rigors of her work, then I am noticing what she's wearing. And therefore the "goes largely unnoticed" is erroneous. "in the face of" is just silly and has no place in the description at all.

So - did I catch any of it?

R
reg

I especially like the eye color: eyes the hue of a summer sky at noon.

However, I'm very picky about such things, and if I was QC I'd ask her to change it. Here's a possible "fix" - so people know that I'm not just critical, I'm also constructive:

Kohl black hair cascades down the back of this youthful-looking elven woman, tumbling to her ankles and framing the milky complexion of her angular face. Eyes the hue of a summer sky at noon gaze brightly at her surroundings, over full ruby lips upturned into an amused smile. Her silken tresses, adorned with gemstones which match her eyes, separate to reveal graceful pointed ears peeking through. A fierce raven perches on one shoulder, its crimson eyes glaring balefully as its head darts to and fro. The woman's attire appears fairly ordinary compared to the smooth, muscular curves which press against the cloth of her gown.

reg

But yeah, I agree with what Desharei said. I'm not a fan of the line "... goes largely unnoticed in the face of her stunning beauty". Really now, let me decide if you're beautiful or not, don't force it on me. reg

quote:

---

Originally posted by Desharei:
I should clarify something. I'm not trashing Andraste's description...for an amateur it's actually pretty damned good.
...

---

An amateur what? reg

I am not singling Andraste out either, actually--it just so happened that she was who I saw, and I looked and well...

The reason for my post was because of all the limitations players (or maybe I should say some) have--(i.e, "you can't have a profession included in the description of an item during an alteration--"A ranger's cloak" is unacceptable to a lot of alterers) and they give you a host of reasons..yet there can be this description of a person telling you that you can SEE she is advancing in age YET she looks remarkably youthful which sounds very contradictive. If she looks remarkably youthful when you look at her, you wouldn't TAKE NOTE of her advancing age just by looking at her as well. I guess this just goes back to the same thing I've been saying was a problem with Simu in the first place--no consistancy.

[This message has been edited by Weedmage Princess (edited 02-17-2002).] reg

R
reg

Game Masters aren't characters.

Game Master are out-of-character and not here to set examples. Other players should set examples, not the GMs.

GMs are notorious for being rather silly. Some only wear burlap sacks, others arrive with 'Saint' attached to their names.

Let 'em have their fun. I'd be more concerned with consistency with the player's alters/items, than I would about what a GM is allowed to have over a character.

'Moonshine' allowed by some GMs, while another disallows it for be 'N. American'. There's the consistency problem I'd be worried about. reg

quote:

---

For those who might miss the humor, it's a parody of how many of us see ourselves in the game (perfectly beautiful always), and intentionally overdone.

Well... all except the raven.

--A. (cross posted from the Roleplaying folder thread, "Is it all about the items?"

---

And Kohl is not the same as coal, it's actually a powder of antimony that is used as an eyeliner. But it too is black.

I will agree tho, that I think it is wrong to allow a GM to have such a description, and yet tell us that the system will not support personalized descriptions.

Aerienne reg

quote:

---

Originally posted by Siara:
Game Masters aren't characters.

Game Master are out-of-character and not here to set examples. Other players should set examples, not the GMs.

Let 'em have their fun.

---

GMs should ALWAYS set an example. If they go around and do whatever they want and not follow their own rules and policies, why would a player be more inclined to listen to them?

That's another thing... I don't think Game Masters should have "fun". They are working. If they want "fun", they can create NPC's and have that fun with other people. It's bad enough they feel the need to enter the game and invoke the OOC behavior. They should beam you into their lounge, and we shouldn't have to see them at all in the game.

YES they infringe on my roleplaying when they show up with their glamorous entries, so they are going against their own policy. But since they're GMs they should be allowed. Not. reg

Your description has a bunch of grammatical errors too. For an expert writer, you're not too big on proofreading. I agree with some of the stuff, but a lot of it was just your opinion on how other people's writing style should be.

Also, kohl black basically means as black as kohl. Its usage is perfectly fine. Just as dirt brown, rose pink, sky blue, etc.

Bianca

[This message has been edited by Bianca (edited 02-17-2002).] reg

As for my own offer for a description, it was a "possible" fix, and I whipped it up in the 10 minutes it took to write the post. If I was a GM, I'd have taken a lot longer. It was offered just to give an idea of what it could have looked like cleaned up a bit.

R
reg

I've seen "professionals" with work that absolutely suck and I've seen amateur work that sucks. I've also seen professional work that is awesome as well as amateur.

Woohoo, Ernest Hemmingway!

I dunno, I just felt that the "amateur writer" comment was a bit silly.

- Pudgee reg

I agree that GMs should set an example.

Isn't 'noon' non-exsistant in Gemstone?

(which is why I would steer clear of Good afternoon, or midnight)

reg

And the word noon is used in a descriptive, "and eyes the hue of a summer sky at noon," which does not mean it is noon, but that her eyes are the same color as the sky is on a typical summer day at the hour when the sun should be directly overhead. And I've never heard that there was no noon or midnight before, unless I have missed something. Which would then rule out the color midnight black, wouldn't it?

Aerienne reg

one who engages in a pursuit, study, science, or sport as a pastime rather than as a profession

synonyms>, mean a person who follows a pursuit without attaining proficiency or professional status. >often applies to one practicing an art without mastery of its essentials ;a painting obviously done by an amateur;;

In the context of my post, I referred to Andraste as a novice, someone who was not a professional writer, nor trained and educated specifically as a writer.

For someone who was not educated specifically as a writer, and who is not a professional writer, she isn't bad at all. But she does lack the education *in writing*. This is evident in the style, form, and structure of her sentences.

How the heck would I know? Who am I to dare say such things, as if I'm some kind of know-it-all? Well, when it comes to math and western civilization, I'm not very smart. Hated both of those courses all through school. But I majored in Print Journalism, minored in Creative Writing, made the Dean's list, served as a Senior Tutor in my last year of college for Freshman English, and have edited hundreds of theses and doctorate papers for college students (for a fee) for the past 10 years. So yeah I think I'm qualified to make such statements, and pick apart people's writing, ESPECIALLY when they work for a game that charges people money for the privilege of reading the text.

If I have to pay to read something, it damned well be beyond my scrutiny, such as it is.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pudgee:
Good for an amateur writer? Just what exactly is an "amateur writer" and how do you tell the difference? The only darn difference is whether or not they have the backing of some company to mass produce their work.

I've seen "professionals" with work that absolutely suck and I've seen amateur work that sucks. I've also seen professional work that is awesome as well as amateur.

Woohoo, Ernest Hemmingway!

I dunno, I just felt that the "amateur writer" comment was a bit silly.

- Pudgee

---

reg

I think it's important because her description could be cleaned up I guess, but I feel such corrections can and should be handled as most things in game can be handled. A private note or whisper can accomplish the same goal without pointing out an error to everyone.

To me it serves little purpose TO point errors out openly except for possibly embarassing someone and creating hard feelings.
reg

quote:

---

Originally posted by Skirmisher:
...but I feel such corrections can and should be handled as most things in game can be handled. A private note or whisper can accomplish the same goal without pointing out an error to everyone.

To me it serves little purpose TO point errors out openly except for possibly embarassing someone and creating hard feelings.

---

I can't speak for everyone else, but my reason for creating this topic was--as previously stated--to see if my peers felt that Andraste (or anyone for that matter) running around with a description like that was a bit contradictive with the new "policy" so to speak on certain types of alterations like having a profession included in a description. I wanted to see if anyone agreed with me, and on the flip side, if anyone disagreed with me and get their views on it. That comment about trying to stir up hard feelings and embarrassment is not only incorrect but also a bit premature considering that as of now, reading the prior posts in this topic, I haven't seen anyone flat out "BASH" Andraste, just critique her appearance which I still do feel is contradictive to the new rules. reg

The hour of noon is has been noted as the hour of Ronan or something weird like that when the new 'Time' and Calendar verbs went into the game.

Noon is not a definition if it doesn't exsist

She should maybe say that the color of the sky when the sun is in place at mid-day or whatever...

If you think THIS is anal, you should join ALAE...

(muttering something about Hubris)

reg

Bianca

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rhain:

The hour of noon is has been noted as the hour of Ronan or something weird like that when the new 'Time' and Calendar verbs went into the game.

Noon is not a definition if it doesn't exsist

She should maybe say that the color of the sky when the sun is in place at mid-day or whatever...

If you think THIS is anal, you should join ALAE...

(muttering something about Hubris)

---

reg

quote:

---

Originally posted by Weedmage Princess:
[B That comment about trying to stir up hard feelings and embarrassment is not only incorrect but also a bit premature considering that as of now, reading the prior posts in this topic, I haven't seen anyone flat out "BASH" Andraste, just critique her appearance which I still do feel is contradictive to the new rules. [/B]

---

Well now, I was not meaning that anyone was "trying" to bash anyone.

Obviously if one wanted to they could come here and say how awful so and so is they should resign now or some such.

What I was saying was that was one result and certainly how the one being so critiqued could take it.

But it all comes down to perception I guess and just as I may have not worded things the best in my prior post so can the earlier posts of others be misconstrued. reg

uh chill?

I didn't invent the TIME and CALENDAR...

I'm just making a point about the nitpickiness of the system..

Coffee is bad for you.

reg

Uh, Roberta, so you know for a fact that she does lack the education... or are you just assuming things, as well as the assumption that she only took 10 minutes to write it? I'd be very careful about making assumptions unless you're a close personal friend, since assumptions have the ability to come and bite you on the backside.

I went to a small forum once and listened to some of the GMs talk about creating areas, and one of them pointed out that "painting" an area was very different for a text-based game where you have to convey imagery that develops in the mind's eye, than say writing a book. While a book might have to follow certain rules and grammar, as you would have learned in creative writing, game development is its own little genre.

This, the GMs were quick to point out, is why you don't have rooms that might be grammatically perfect. An ex-GM friend of mine shared that her experience, as a journalist, meant a lot of putting aside of the rules, since her rooms just ended up looking stilted, dull, and punctuated with, well, a lot of distracting punctuation! Rooms should me like poetry, and poetry can be written without certain rules.

Besides, I think there is certainly no one "right" way to write creatively. If that were true, there would be no need for bookstores, we could just keep putting different covers on the same book.

It does seem to have turned into a "bash Andraste" thread. This could have gone into the "Alterations" folder since it's certainly not going to lead to the demise of the game. She's not the only one with a funky personal look, if that's what you really think it is. She just seems to make a nice target for people to pick on, when there are far worse out there.

Actually, the far worse award goes to many of the players.

*~*~ Wysteria

[This message has been edited by Wysteria (edited 02-20-2002).] reg

Heh... can't really argue on that one.

In any case... I wouldn't be too worried on the specific grammar errors, or whatnot found within the description.

Language isn't about nitpicking over grammar or tiny details, I mean some of the greatest philosophical essays and even stories (such as Shakespeare's) were full of errors, some philosophers didn't even bother to punctuate or capitalize, but they still wrote EXCELLENT essays.

If you can read that description, and without having to check over the spelling and such, find it to be pretty nifty overall, then that's all there is to it. GMs don't follow alteration rules or alteration policies, that's hands down obvious. But I mean when you have the word GameMaster in front of your character, that pretty much should spell out OOC, not a player, etc... ...

- Lord Kranar, human Archwizard

[This message has been edited by LordKranar (edited 02-20-2002).] reg

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wysteria:
Uh, Roberta, so you know for a fact that she does lack the education... or are you just assuming things, as well as the assumption that she only took 10 minutes to write it? I'd be very careful about making assumptions unless you're a close personal friend, since assumptions have the ability to come and bite you on the backside.

---

I never said, implied, or otherwise infered that Andraste took only 10 minutes to write her description. I did, however, say that *I* took 10 minutes to write my suggested alternate description to her original.

[snip about what you learned in your forum about the difference between game building and novel writing]

Yes I know all about that. I was trained by none other than Kuromaku, when I worked with a group of Sorcerers to design the original Sorcerer's guild (which you now see only in very small bits and pieces in GemStoneIII). I was then much more rigidly trained in the game I play now, when I was a GM there.

quote:

---

Besides, I think there is certainly no one "right" way to write creatively. If that were true, there would be no need for bookstores, we could just keep putting different covers on the same book.

---

Romance novels all follow a typical pattern, or "rules" for writing to attract a specific demographic.

Every single magazine has its own set of "rules" of writing style. An author's story will be rejected unless those rules are followed.

Text games *must* follow a specific flow, as determined by its administrators, or the reader will move around the game as if in a daze. Each game has its own set of rules, although most dynamic RPGs follow similar ones.

GemStoneIII has an entire group of staff members dedicated to Quality Control, in part to function specifically as "checkers" of built areas and object descriptions, to make sure they "fit the mold." In coding language, everything is an object. From your account name, to your character, to whatever he or she has in his/her inventory, to the "rooms" he/she walks through and anything within those rooms.

Objects must follow specific guidelines of descriptions. Otherwise, you might find this:

n
You are in a really kewl room with lots of stuff in it.
Obvious exits: o, sw

o
A wintry scene descends upon you, making you tremble with cold. Your eyes shift toward an enormous boulder on your left, and you wonder why it's there.
Obvious exits: u, w

w
An east-west path ends abruptly at a wall of rock, stretching high above the cliff face. Small stones scatter upon the road, dust rising upon a gentle southerly breeze. A fallen tree crosses the path toward the north, its branches cracked and singed from a long-ago fire.
Obvious exits: e

Each of these examples above are similar to things I've seen in different games. Each are perfectly fine, within the context of those specific games. Combined, however, they are utterly inappropriate, as they use completely different styles. Without form, there is chaos.

quote:

---

It does seem to have turned into a "bash Andraste" thread. This could have gone into the "Alterations" folder since it's certainly not going to lead to the demise of the game. She's not the only one with a funky personal look, if that's what you really think it is. She just seems to make a nice target for people to pick on, when there are far worse out there.

Actually, the far worse award goes to many of the players.

---

I'm not the one who put this thread into the folder. I only responded to it. I agree there are far worse out there, but if the Administrators of GemStoneIII create specific rules for building and describing things, and then break their own rules or allow their staff to do so, then they are cheapening their own game and destroying their integrity.

The players don't have the tools to create their own descriptions, and at the present time they can't build their own areas. They are also not staff members hired (with or without pay) to present the game world to paying customers. I do, however, certainly hope they will be required to abide by *some* sort of standard once ALAE is implemented.

R

[This message has been edited by Desharei (edited 02-20-2002).] reg

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wysteria:
[It does seem to have turned into a "bash Andraste" thread. This could have gone into the "Alterations" folder since it's certainly not going to lead to the demise of the game. She's not the only one with a funky personal look, if that's what you really think it is. She just seems to make a nice target for people to pick on, when there are far worse out there.

---

Perhaps a review of my posts are in order because you've clearly missed the point, Wysteria. The reason I made the topic was not because of how pretty/ugly/pretty ugly I thought Andraste's get up was, not because it WAS Andraste (because I would have made this thread no matter WHO it was), but because her (or anyone no matter who it would/could have been) was able to have such a description--in the initial post if you'd be kind enough to take a look at it, I bolded the section describing her FACIAL features because that was my main beef, not an item of CLOTHING or anything she was wearing so that's my "first of all" argument opposing your "This should be in the Alterations folder not the Concerns folder" statement. Secondly, I went on to say in a latter post that I had an issue with the fact that I feel it's unfair for people in Gemstone to make a rule, then have it apply to only SOME people. (the instance I used was how some GMs would gripe and moan and raise general Hell about a description referring to a profession yet she could run around the way she was.) This is just a mere example of a general concern that I myself and quite a few others have been complaining about for quite some time now, the consistancy (or lack there of) of setting a rule and enforcing it with everyone in the game. That's not an issue with an alteration, that's a gamewide concern, a GEMSTONE CONCERN--so I figured this was the place to put it. I don't really give a flying (insert preffered four letter word here)
about any alterations, but I do care about consistancy with the rules.

I'm sure I'm going to get some disagreement on this one, but I don't agree with the whole "Well if it's a GM then they are OOC and you can't expect them to behave IC in Gemstone and the IC/in genre rules don't apply." No. Not if you are going to have a "roleplaying game" at least. If they are going to interact in the game, (and I don't mean while they are on "duty" like responding to an assist or report, I mean at an event, or "socializing" with other players playing out in the open) they should too be in character, in genre. I'm sorry but I can't help but laugh at a GM who one minute is giving you a [SEND] Please don't do (whatever) anymore because it's not considered "in genre." then a couple of days later is one west of the bank with all kinds of people going by talking about "Well I don't know if we can replace your item because as far as I know we've had no troubles with our servers crashing or any reports of lag." (this is something I've personally seen by the way) My thing is if Simutronics is trying to create a certain atmosphere, then at the very least their staff should be doing their part to create that image. That's just my opinion though; I know there are a few here who disagree with that and I'd rather like to hear their reasons why.

[This message has been edited by Weedmage Princess (edited 02-21-2002).] reg

I know lots of people who would like to make their characters more visible interesting/different, such as having a rotund cleric, without having people make the assumption that they must be a muscular/svelte individual of stunning beauty, which is the common belief in the game.

And yep, I know you can get this across in the RP, THAT is not the issue I am asking about.

Aerienne reg

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aerienne:
Anyone involved in the coding portion of the game or with the coding know-how want to explain why the GMs tell us that we cannot add anything extra to the player's descriptions, such as EMERALD green eyes or adding body type, rather than just the standard features, and yet GMs are capable of having something different?

Because apparently it's not coded into the GS3 character manager, like it is in DR, and you can't chose those features.

GM vary their features by creating those flashy come-and-go scripts they use when they answer assists and referrals. Look at those who use them and you will see they have a personal look. Those without it don't seem to.

Goodness, I imagine that if someone wanted such a custom "look", they'd likely have to pay a princely sum in real dollars, mostly for the personal attention of a single GM to create a script and test it. Not to mention that it would take that person away from their duties.

If this choice was given to everyone, they'd likely have to hire several GMs just to work on all the requests. And you would have to pay each time you wanted to change it.

I know lots of people who would like to make their characters more visible interesting/different, such as having a rotund cleric, without having people make the assumption that they must be a muscular/svelte individual of stunning beauty, which is the common belief in the game.

And yep, I know you can get this across in the RP, THAT is not the issue I am asking about.

Aerienne

---

Then what are you asking for? Features like DR has? DR has a much younger, newer engine and many newer systems. That's pretty apparent when you look at their mechanics. GS3 is much older, and they've already told us several times they are updating, but it's a slow process. You have to make sure the new works with the old.

Might GS3 get there someday? Sure they could. But whining about GM personal scripts isn't going to make it happen any faster. A much more constructive, not to mention proactive response, would be to send Melissa or feedback requests to look into DR's feature system and ask if it could be integrated.

I don't predetermine that everyone is musular or svelte based on the limits of the system. I base my "image" of the character on the person's ability to roleplay and impart some idea about their carriage. I've met many wimpy warriors that give their heart and try their best. They aren't all brawny and Kai-like.

The imagination is such a great tool, and personally, I think it's sad that some people feel they need "props" or prefer a graphical game to a text game, instead of relying on this wonderful and unlimited ability.

I have to disagree that the way a GM looks dilutes the game in any way. They're OOC, everyone knows it. I look to see what they're wearing for amusement.

More so, it's the players who manage to manipulate merchants and connive items that appear to be in-genre as stand-alones, but when assembled, the outfit looks horribly out of place, that serves to dilute the game. A school girl uniform, someone wandering around in a bathrobe and slippers, another wearing a perky sundress, barrettes and sandals while carrying a picnic basket.

Go back to the post, where Andraste herself said her description was a parody. Oh, and I'll take from the lack of answers to my direct questions, that no one's really seen anything else that Andraste has worked on that's part of the game and how she has contributed. And see that she's being judged on one thing, and it was meant to be humorous.

I've ranted long enough...

*~*~* Wysteria reg

I could judge Andraste about dozens of different things, but this thread has nothing to do with those things. It has only to do with the description. Now, if YOU want to make an issue of Andraste, or ask people what we think of her personally, toss it into another thread, and pray it doesn't turn into a flame fest. You won't see me there though.

R
reg

And that was not a script that was posted. That was Andraste's look description. So unless you are telling me that a look description is part of an entrance script, then their coding allows for additional descriptives.

And you may believe that because GMs are OOC, that anything goes, but there are many of us who feel that GMs should set the example and the tone for alterations in genre and style. This is what I believe was the origial intent of the thread. I haven't read any comments about Andraste herself and a lack of contribution to Elanthia. I think she adds a lot to the game. But that is not the issue we are discussing.

And I love how I specifically posted that I know that personal characteristics can be RPed, but it would also be nice to have the written description, but you turned that around into "I think it's sad that some people feel they need 'props'". Not everything can or should be left entirely to the imagination, even in a text game. That is why we have items in the game, and why people are so in love with altering them TO SUIT THEIR CHARACTERS.

The majority of characters that I have met in the game, particularly females, are in some way, roleplayed to be attractive or exceptionally goodlooking. And the ones who are not, are usually comedic or only trotted out for certain occasions and are not primary characters.

I have no idea where you are getting this princely sum idea as for costs. Alterations do not or at least should not cost much. And I don't see how changing body features is much different than an alteration.

Aerienne reg

The character manager is limited to only a few options, and you choose those options at the beginning and they stick with you for life. Now if you wanted to change your appearance after you've been rolled up, you'd be limited only to the other available options found within the character manager.

Probably has to do with the fact that the description is hard coded into the system. Now of course, this doesn't make it impossible to change your description to something neat, it just makes it something very tedious to do since you'd have to alter the code and so for the sake of consistency, the GMs don't allow anyone to change their description.

Kind of like why you can't change your last name. It's possible to change it definintely... but because it's hard coded int the C language if you were to change it there would be so many negative consequences and bugs that would fly out of no where and that would have to be dealt with individually... hence the reason why we don't see many people given the option to change their name.

- Lord Kranar, human Archwizard reg

Aerienne reg

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aerienne:
And that was not a script that was posted. That was Andraste's look description. So unless you are telling me that a look description is part of an entrance script, then their coding allows for additional descriptives.

---

That's exactly what I was saying. That because their entrances and exits accompany a custom"look" that it is probably a script tied into their ability to go to and from where they are, to people in the game. Those without it look just like you and me.

Why don't you ask Andraste or another GM next time you see one on a referral or in the game in their features are from the character manager or just another fancy script? That could certainly resolve this guessing.

*~*~* Wysteria reg

Everything in a text game is an "object," as I've mentioned previously. Each object has an official "name." Knife, package, Wysteria, Andraste.

Each of these objects is a copy, or clone, of a "parent" object. Generic_OHE_weapon, generic_wearable_container, generic_premium_player, generic_senior_GM.

Each of these parent objects has specific coded qualities.

weapon: can use to attack (one set of code). can be dropped (another set of code). can have an adjective, trailer, and name change ("big," "with a gem-encrusted handle," "knife."), is "non-sentient" (cannot talk or move on its own or die - a rather large set of code that is applied in the positive only to sentient things, rather than applied in the negative to non-sentient things - most likely a toggle switch - on or off)

(etc. on the rest of the stuff)

Descriptions can be applied to all objects. Adjectives can be applied to all objects. Trailers can be applied to all objects.

Description, adjectives, and trailers have limitations (example, only 3 adjectives per object max_limit - such as, a torn filthy brown backpack)

The ability to teleport is most likely an altered version of one of the teleport spells. Or actually, the teleport spells are more likely an altered version of the GM-teleport ability, with specific limits and jazzy scripts added to them.

As Bestatte, I was able to "poof" into a special room in the Dev area, and "poof" back, though my "poof" script didn't have me do so in a flash of light. It was just a "suddenly appears" and "suddenly disappears" thing, which is probably the default script that GM "poofing" starts with, and the GM can change their poof to whatever they like if they have the status to do so.

Mentors can also "poof."

The ability to teleport is common to ALL MUDs, for their staff and in some cases their players. The ability to have custom descriptions is common to MOST MUDs *that I have played* whether or not the players are able to teleport or not.

Players *can* (meaning, the coding exists at the present time) have custom descriptions for their characters. However, because of the extraordinary variety of writing skills, and lack thereof among the player base, all those descriptions would have to be subject to quality control (which as you know is also varied in skill).

Given the sheer number of players, and assuming that even 50% of them would want a custom description (who wouldn't!!!), this would mean taking Quality Control OUT of business on every other project the game has right now, and devoting all their energies to QC'ing custom descriptions for months, if not years. Reason being...so'and'so sends a request. It ain't no good. Back to the drawing board. Comes back with more errors. Rejected again. Comes back with less errors, but needs tweaking, Rejected again. And that's just ONE request.

It isn't reasonable to expect that characters in GS will ever have custom descriptions, though it is certainly *possible* per the coding for them to have them.

In smaller games, it is possible and in fact I'm surprised that H&X doesn't allow its player base to do so.

R
reg

quote:

---

Originally posted by Desharei:
Their ability to look a certain way has no connection whatsoever with the coding that lets them jump from point A to point B.

I never said it was the coding that allows them to move that controls how they look. I said that those with flashy exits and entrances also seem to accompany a custom appearance, which draws the parallel that somehow they've added a script on top of the coding to do this. My point was that it was not an actual "feature" they can select in a roller.

<snip all the ya-da ya-da>

As Bestatte, I was able to "poof" into a special room in the Dev area, and "poof" back, though my "poof" script didn't have me do so in a flash of light. It was just a "suddenly appears" and "suddenly disappears" thing, which is probably the default script that GM "poofing" starts with, and the GM can change their poof to whatever they like if they have the status to do so.

Right, Redorc had one of those amulets you could tap to summon a GM, or pull to go to the Guild. More like a fancy transport ring with a modified script on it.

Mentors can also "poof."

Judging from what I saw posted when some disgruntled person exposed the mentors, it's a command they use. Just another script, but a generic one since it applies to many.

Players *can* (meaning, the coding exists at the present time) have custom descriptions for their characters. However, because of the extraordinary variety of writing skills, and lack thereof among the player base, all those descriptions would have to be subject to quality control (which as you know is also varied in skill).

Never argued they can't have a custom look, or that it would be impossible for them to have one. I believe I even said that it would have to be a "script." If it were something you could roll up, we could have it. Doesn't make sense that only GMs could roll up with special looks.

Given the sheer number of players, and assuming that even 50% of them would want a custom description (who wouldn't!!!), this would mean taking Quality Control OUT of business on every other project the game has right now, and devoting all their energies to QC'ing custom descriptions for months, if not years. Reason being...so'and'so sends a request. It ain't no good. Back to the drawing board. Comes back with more errors. Rejected again. Comes back with less errors, but needs tweaking, Rejected again. And that's just ONE request.

It isn't reasonable to expect that characters in GS will ever have custom descriptions, though it is certainly *possible* per the coding for them to have them.

R

---

Exactly. I said this too! So there's no argument there.

Since the script would need to be personalized, I would hope it was also sent to someone for quality control and testing since it could not just be autogenerated and applied. I bet the process would be a low priority compared to bugs, new areas, spells, etc.

So what's everyone getting all upset and defensive about? Glad we agree then! Perhaps someday the systems in DR will mesh with GM and everyone can have emerald green eyes.

*~*~* Wysteria reg

If it was a script, the person would look normal (as in, out of the roller), and whenever he did that trigger/command, people looking at him would see something different.

A custom description is just that. A description. No flashy scripts involved. It's no different from a description of a tree.

look tree

The trunk climbs up to the sky, with dozens of leaf-laden branches unfurling outward.

look wysteria

The woman's spunky curls flow like golden tendrils over her shoulders.

No difference whatsoever beyond the actual text in the description itself.

R
reg

Personally, I wasn't looking for the total custom look like Andraste has. I was look for an expanded list or some basic, already QCed descriptions.

In the Premie folder on the main boards, there were several threads that discussed character descriptions, because we were asked for suggestions on second and third year gifts. MANY people wanted either personalized descriptions, or at least one feature changed. We were told the coding would not allow it.

And if one or two GMs proofed a list with QC, then changing these things would seem to be no more difficult than getting an alteration done.

Aerienne

reg

R
reg

I don't think the code does allow for this.

The character class and GM class are different. Character class involves description, stats, profession, skills etc etc... the GM class is a different class.

In order to save on memory, or resources, or just for efficiency sake, the character class is most likely set up so that your description is stored as a number instead of a string of text. So instead of it being something like:

playerindex[1].eyecolor = "brown"

It's

playerindex[1].eyecolor = 2

And 2 represents brown. Additionally the character stucture probably only supports a finite number of descriptions for the body parts.

- Lord Kranar, human Archwizard reg

I know that awhile back, there were player helpers on one of the events (might have been a parade, or it might have been one of those massive merchant thingies, can't remember). It was PLAYERS who were turned into the interesting characters, not the GMs. Certain players who had been given the ability. I believe they were all part of the mentor system at the time, if memory serves me correctly.

So, the code exists - it just isn't "toggled on" for PCs.

R

[edited to add the following]

Someone just reminded me that characters in GS can now wear makeup that alters their physical description. So guess what - not only *can* it be done, but it's already being done with limitations!

[This message has been edited by Desharei (edited 02-23-2002).] reg

Buckwheet reg